When I first read the article, a pop up box appeared advertising a subscription. I pressed the X on the box to remove it and the full article appeared.
It let me see the first couple of sentences, then covers it with "To read the full article, subscribe".
Holy crap! People lost their jobs over vaccines that Dr. Birx said she knew ‘didn’t work’ Dr. Birx went onto Your World with Neil Cavuto confirmed that people had good reason to be suspicious of the efficacy of the vaccines. Remember, people were literally fired for not getting this vaccine. People were cancelled for even questioning the data, the protectiveness of which now Dr. Birx admits was "overplayed".
And, January of THIS year, CDC agreed to clarify which of the deaths associated with COVID were FROM the disease vs. WITH the disease. (Though, it doesn't appear that clarification has actually yet been provided.)
i didn't see in the article where she said they "didn't work". Pretty early on health scientists found and published that they were better at preventing severe disease and death than they were at preventing infection. The data is changing a bit but it still seems to show that the chance of infection is 3 times higher in the unvaccinated while the rate of death is 6X higher. It used to be 12X higher but I presume the change is because Omicron is (a) more transmissible, and (b) less lethal than the delta was last year. What was more of an unknown at the time she's talking about (and to some extent it still is) is whether the vaccines had/have any effect on ease of transmission to others.
The argument for enforcing vaccinations, and firing people for not getting them, is that it was a societal risk. If those in charge knew the vaccines did not prevent infection, which she admits they knew, then the argument for forcing this on everyone was founded on a lie.
Lie is a strong word...thrown around too often by both sides. If it lowers transmissibility...then it is not a lie to believe that it decreases societal risk.
At what point is taking away someone's livelihood justified from preventing the possible spread of a usually non lethal disease? I don't want to downplay the risk of Covid as it currently is but my mother who refused to be vaccinated contracted it last month. She was pretty weak and ill for 2 weeks. She's doing pretty well now. She's 99 years of age!
That's one way of putting it Stu....another way is to state that if it lowers transmissibility, it will in fact decrease societal risk.
Lie is a strong word. And thrown around too often. And for politicians, I generally don't care. But she is not a politician, and her influence on policy cannot be understated, and her presentation of facts, and self-admission that she intentionally lied to get a specific result, freely opens her up to the being labeled as a liar. The foundation of the argument to remove everyone's right of refusal was that this PREVENTED TRANSMISSION. She freely admitted she knew this to not be true. The change of cost / benefit significantly changes when considering if the vaccine "prevents transmission" vs. "improves personal risk". If the only risk is to MY health, where does anyone have the right to force my choice. The argument that was made was that forcing the chemical into my body prevented transmission to others. That is the lie, and the foundation, and why it matters.
Seems as if we've devolved into semantics here.....one can argue that the vaccine is not "preventative" in that it is not 100% effective. One cannot argue -- or let's just say the best data available would indicate - that the vaccine materially reduces the probability of transmission and infection, therefore will "prevent" scores from getting sick and as a result reduces the risk to our healthcare system and severe disease and death to our society. If it were truly and solely a personal risk, I would be more sympathetic to the argument, but with all due respect, I just can't get my mind around that view. On a related note, my personal opinion is that the politicization of this pandemic (both sides bearing varying degrees of guilt to be certain) and the social media-induced democratization of science will set public health in our country back for a generation or more. Sadly, I think we're already beginning to see the first wave.....certainly interested to hear from our resident docs here on this point
It will interesting to see the differences. Most other relevant datasets that I have seen referenced would suggest that if anything, we've more likely undercounted to some degree. Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19
Her flip answer as "overplaying their hand" on the vaccine mandates is about as crass a statement from a public official as you'll ever hear. Because of their heavy handed approach we tanked a booming economy, closed thousands of businesses permanently, bankrupted families, ignited a crime wave, added trillions to the national debt, created a new remote work environment that is unmanageable, robbed a generation of children of a couple of years of socialization, classroom instruction, proms, activities, etc, kick started a new wave of drug activities and related deaths. And they created multiple rules and regulations on pandemic personal behavior based on perceived class and socioeconomic status. I dutifully got the first two doses of Pfizer vaxx and then the first booster. I was planning to get my second booster this fall but after Birx' mea culpa I may just skip it. I am no longer sold on the value of it.
Thank you T, Sid, Stu, et al, I definitely appreciate your willingness to discuss your ideas with me.
Likewise Kes, obviously this is one the most intensely debated topics in our times and is tearing our country apart along a number of dimensions. I am truly grateful to have the opportunity for civil discourse on difficult issues with articulate and thoughtful people even on topics about which we may have some disagreements. This place seems a little kinder and gentler since the "swamp", mercifully, was drained....fwiw
Likewise, I still haven't gotten my second booster. I'll continue to follow the data and the advice of my primary care doc and of course my not-shy-with-medical-advice-for-her-old-Dad daughter currently in her 3rd year of med school. His most recent advice (two weeks ago) on the topic was that I should wait until the omicron specific vaccine soon available for distribution as it's efficacy on the current dominant variant was vastly superior than the existing formulations. If it wasn't available by end of September, he himself would be getting what's available and would recommend same for me....we're both same age 66 this fall.
I am all in on the Vax, quad boosted. Initially the antivax crowd seemed to be focus on that it was untested and they didn't want to be Guinea pigs or some crazies thought it was a government plot to control us. Now about a year later billions of people have been vaxed with very few side effects. Personally if you aren't vaxed because it hasn't been tested enough or some such reason then you should stop taking almost every medication you currently take. Has it been a magic bullet, no, has it been with zero side effects, no. Has it been an effective tool, absolutely unless your standard is eradication of Covid. Taking the 4th booster, which is just another dose of what you got before just as that 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc pill of antibiotic that you take for an infection. Is not going to mean you are not going to be able to get the new "tweaked" booster. I am getting my Tetanus booster this week. I have always gotten the flu shot, I have the pneumonia Vax, the old Shingles Vax and the new Shingrix Vax. I have all the usual childhood Vax. Vax fear is not in my makeup.